(01-26-2021 06:37 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 05:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Back to the Biden Administration...

Are you environmentalists happy with his killing of the pipeline? Now, instead of a nice clean pipeline, the crude will have to be trucked down. Not to mention the jobs lost.

How about the ban on drilling on national lands? I understand that will be a major impact on New Mexico. Thousands of jobs lost.

Just wondering if this is something yall take as a good move.

The jobs aren't the issue here - the number of full time jobs added was minimal. It's the other issue - the less safe method of transportation - that's more concerning to me. I understand the rationale to oppose the pipeline, that providing this simple, easier, and safer process continues to support a really dirty type of fossil fuel production. But it ignores the reality that said production is going to continue, regardless of the pipeline.

(01-26-2021 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I wasn't a supporter of the Keystone XL, but I was against the opposition to it.

I find that I feel that way about a lot of things!

(01-26-2021 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I have absolutely zero issue with banning fracking, drilling, etc. on federal lands and support that decision. Our public lands are one of our best natural resources, and restricting their use for energy production helps to maintain their quality and health, and it reduces all of the impacts associated with that energy production and use.

I don't quite know enough to say that I support a complete ban for federal lands, but I certainly agree that conservation of such lands is the paramount consideration. After all, conservation is historically the chief reason for their establishment, and philosophically the essence of conservatism.

I agree on the conservation of federal lands, but disagree on the jobs, impact, and fracking.

Jobs: I think the biggest loss will be in the jobs that would be created by more activity, but now will not be. It's not the truck drivers that service existing sites that will be losing their jobs - it's all the truck drivers (et al) who will not get hired to work on wells that are not drilled. Of course, there is a ripple effect, too - not only direct workers, but indirect workers, and the people who make their livings from the workers, such as bankers and waitresses. I saw a boom. We went from 4 banks to 15, we built a dozen new motels, we built two new shopping centers, and a lot of people are still employed in those places.

Impact: I don't know the laws in NM, but here in Texas, when they drilled gas wells on my property, there was a lot of oversight. I don't see why it would be much different on federal lands.

Fracking: All the wells on my land were fracked, as well as several thousand others in the area where I live, and I think the fracking bugaboo is about as real as monsters under the bed.

I think a balance can be achieved between exploration and environmental safety. This is not a balance.

BTW, I have two pipelines crossing my land, so I can speak from experience on that matter, too.